*/
Blogging artist Isobel Williams on her work in the highest court in the land.
Since July 2012 I have been an occasional blogger-with-a-difference in the Supreme Court, with the court’s permission. The difference is that I illustrate my blog with drawings which I do on the spot; I rarely embellish them afterwards.
As far as the words go, there are plenty of lawyers who produce technical analyses of the proceedings. Being a non-lawyer, I riff on the general theme of the case, such as terrorism (R v Gul), harassment (Hayes v Willoughby) or pensions (Nortel and Lehman). Sometimes I go off on a tangent, as when drawing itself became my story in Bull v Hall.
Concerning the pictures, there are practicalities. I can’t use some of my favourite drawing materials – bamboo pens, wooden coffee stirrers, quills, sheep’s wool tufts – as they need to be dipped in ink. Splashing a bottle of that onto the multi-coloured carpet designed by Sir Peter Blake would not endear me to the authorities. Similarly, I have to avoid the noisy friction of extravagant sweeps across textured paper.
Like the Derby, the Supreme Court is on the flat – no elevated jury, no witness box – so from the public seats it’s about the backs of heads and chairs, with the justices far away across the howling tundra. How do you deal with that? Sometimes I experiment with transparent outlines. In the drawing of R v Hughes (opposite), the justices are pink ectoplasm, the staff and judicial assistants orange. Opera glasses are an option I am yet to explore.
In each courtroom, discreet amplification emphasises every breath, every rustle, every moment of nervous tension. In the stark white box of Court 2, the plushy floral curtains aren’t enough to insulate counsel from the relentless scrape of the minute hand on the slate clock or the finality of the omega on the court emblem. It’s all right for me – I can just sit here scribbling and ingerpainting with compressed charcoal while fine minds deal in cool abstractions.
So which is more important, the art or the text? The answer is neither: it’s the Supreme Court itself. One day when I noted some choice aperçus from the bench, a tweeter put me in my place by recommending my blog post ‘not for the drawings, but brilliant comments from Baroness Hale’.
Isobel Williams, Blogging Artist
Posts are on www.isobelwilliams.blogspot.com (click on the ‘Supreme Court’ label) and on www. ukscblog.com, the independent blog about the Supreme Court run by Matrix and Olswang.
Isobel is an artist, blogger and PR consultant. She draws at the Supreme Court and other
challenging locations, including the Occupy camp outside St Paul’s.
As far as the words go, there are plenty of lawyers who produce technical analyses of the proceedings. Being a non-lawyer, I riff on the general theme of the case, such as terrorism (R v Gul), harassment (Hayes v Willoughby) or pensions (Nortel and Lehman). Sometimes I go off on a tangent, as when drawing itself became my story in Bull v Hall.
Concerning the pictures, there are practicalities. I can’t use some of my favourite drawing materials – bamboo pens, wooden coffee stirrers, quills, sheep’s wool tufts – as they need to be dipped in ink. Splashing a bottle of that onto the multi-coloured carpet designed by Sir Peter Blake would not endear me to the authorities. Similarly, I have to avoid the noisy friction of extravagant sweeps across textured paper.
Like the Derby, the Supreme Court is on the flat – no elevated jury, no witness box – so from the public seats it’s about the backs of heads and chairs, with the justices far away across the howling tundra. How do you deal with that? Sometimes I experiment with transparent outlines. In the drawing of R v Hughes (opposite), the justices are pink ectoplasm, the staff and judicial assistants orange. Opera glasses are an option I am yet to explore.
In each courtroom, discreet amplification emphasises every breath, every rustle, every moment of nervous tension. In the stark white box of Court 2, the plushy floral curtains aren’t enough to insulate counsel from the relentless scrape of the minute hand on the slate clock or the finality of the omega on the court emblem. It’s all right for me – I can just sit here scribbling and ingerpainting with compressed charcoal while fine minds deal in cool abstractions.
So which is more important, the art or the text? The answer is neither: it’s the Supreme Court itself. One day when I noted some choice aperçus from the bench, a tweeter put me in my place by recommending my blog post ‘not for the drawings, but brilliant comments from Baroness Hale’.
Isobel Williams, Blogging Artist
Posts are on www.isobelwilliams.blogspot.com (click on the ‘Supreme Court’ label) and on www. ukscblog.com, the independent blog about the Supreme Court run by Matrix and Olswang.
Blogging artist Isobel Williams on her work in the highest court in the land.
Since July 2012 I have been an occasional blogger-with-a-difference in the Supreme Court, with the court’s permission. The difference is that I illustrate my blog with drawings which I do on the spot; I rarely embellish them afterwards.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
By Kem Kemal, CEO, Henry Dannell
By BSK Financial Planning
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs
Susie Griffin on the admin that keeps barristers from billable work
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Kick off your career at the Bar Council’s Pupillage Fair this October – it’s one of the most valuable opportunities for aspiring barristers, says Amelia Clegg
Join us on Saturday 21 November 2026 at Leeds Beckett University and see for yourself why the North continues to be an exceptional place to build a career at the Bar
The golden age of advocacy? David Langwallner pays homage to the filmic if contentious barrister Sir Edward Carson and some of his contemporaries
Henry Fingerhut outlines what the Bar Standards Board AI guidance means for early career barristers
Not yet, says Jacob Turner. Regulation, unlike the technology itself, is a domain the legal profession can still control
